Misplaced Pages

User talk:Chipmunkdavis: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:44, 19 November 2016 editGiorgi Balakhadze (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,428 edits →Attempt to privatize article about Georgia: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:42, 26 December 2024 edit undoFowler&fowler (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers62,983 edits →Season's Greetings: Reply thanks for your noteTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User talk:Chipmunkdavis/ArchiveBox}}
{{archive box|]<br>], ], ], ]<br>], ], ]<br>], ]|auto=no|search=yes}}
{{user new message|color=lightblue|name=Chipmunkdavis}} {{user new message|color=lightblue|name=Chipmunkdavis}}


Welcome! If you post on this page, I will respond on this page. If I post on your talk page, I will have it watchlisted for the duration of the conversation (and possibly longer!), but please feel free to ping me if I appear to have missed something.
]


{{clear}}
If '''you''' post on ''this page'', I will respond on ''this page''.


== Please explain this to me ==
If '''I''' post on ''your talk page'', I will have it watchlisted for the duration of the conversation (and possibly longer!)


I do not understand why you reverted my edit on ] or ],while it is probably within the range of talk page use,it was not related to those articles, the thread on ] I removed because it was related to the article ],not the Article ],and the thread on ] I removed is because it was related to the article ],not the article ] ] (]) (]) 03:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
== A barnstar for you! ==


:also in ] I removed an uncivil comment,that happens on wikipedia when comments are not civil, am I wrong? ] (]) (]) 03:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
::I did not revert your edit on Talk:Canada. There is a point where discussions are removed but both of those threads did not get close to that point. Uncivil comments are not usually removed no, and the one you removed was not even uncivil. Please stop trying to moderate talkpages, it takes some time to become familiar with the norms here. ] (]) 04:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
:::Looking at your contribution history,I see you to have removed comments and threads,for example,that is what I was trying to do <span style="color: Purple">] (] ]!)</span> 02:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
::::That is not what you were doing. A clear difference for example is that the comment I removed was random gibberish, the comments you removed were about article development. ] (]) 02:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
|-
::::@], I'm going to try being blunt again: you are a comparatively inexperienced editor. If you are not yet sure what the distinctions in the rules are generally understood to be, then please refrain from enforcing those rules and just observe what others do instead for now, and ask about things that might be real problems first. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I noticed that you haven't edited in quite some time, so I just wanted to let you know that your efforts here were greatly appreciated and are missed! ] (]) 05:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
|}
:Seconded. I hope everything is OK, and look forward to seeing you around for more excellent country related work in future! &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp;] (]) 13:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
::Thank you ] and ] for your messages; they are appreciated. Put simply, I was growing increasingly tired of Misplaced Pages editing and the conflicts that came with it, and so decided to leave for awhile. My life has since moved on, and having more time I hope to pop around more often from now on. Glad to see you both still editing. Regards, ] (]) 22:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Good to see you back! I'm still doing what I can, when I have the time, which is not as often as I'd like, sadly. All the best, and looking forward to seeing you here when you pop in. &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp;] (]) 14:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Welcome back! Yes I know the feeling well. It's often hard to stay motivated around here. ] (]) 03:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


== Good article nominee ==
== Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll ==


Hello, I recently nominated the article '']'' as a good article under the Language and literature subtopic, though I believe it could also fit under World history. Since you have not "contributed significantly" to the article, you might be able to review it according to the criteria. I would like to know if, having the necessary skills for this, you would be willing to do so. Thank you, ] (]) 12:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. ] ] (]) 09:31, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


:Noted ]. I am not full of time at the moment, but I will keep it in mind for the next time I look at GAN. Fear not someone will look at it at some point. Best, ] (]) 15:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==


== Sorry to bug you ==
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692221704 -->


<s>Is my reasons at ] not clear or out to lunch? Should I remove the tag over tryng to move forward in improve the section? Is this just a case of one of us or both of us exhibiting</s> '']''. <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 18:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
== Small Potatoes ( grammar ) ==
:Nevermind...going with ] to much effort for any change.SORRY TO TAKE UP YOUR READING TIME! <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 20:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Pentecost falls on the tenth day after Ascension Thursday (40 days after Easter). The sentence above is formally confusing , on its face . This sentence is the last line of the introductory paragraph . I could delve into the formal reasons for this structure/meaning confusion ,but the obviousness of the problem , would argue against any such tiresome chore . The , all too apparent , shoddy syntax , could be easily remedied by the deletion of the parentheses and the addition of 2 words to render the phrase therein as a clausal construct . Well , " eezy-peezy " you might think - if your inner dialogue included late 90's idiom - but , as it turns out , not so . The last time I engaged in this sort of ad-hoc syntactical smoothing for the purpose of clarifying , not changing , a writer's meaning - I believe it was , as basic as, noun-verb number agreement - my virtual knuckles were smartly rapped with a threat to report and then brand me with some odious Acronym . Needless to say , I refrained from reverting , nor did I engage in disputation , for a number of reasons . At this point , I could go on , concerning the distinction between proof-reading and editorial concerns , but I won't -- And I won't alter the confused and confusing sentence that occasioned this overly prolix diatribe .Bjhodge8 (talk) 05:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I posted the above on the ,https://en.wikipedia.org/Pentecost talk-page . I think I need some friendly guidance . B


== Why are you doing this?!? == == Join the talk ==


Why did you undo my writting?
Hello. I've just wondered because of your reverts! You really don't have any convincing reasons for your reverts and I really don't know why are you doing this, but please stop. Those maps are exactly based on ] map. Also the new maps that I've uploaded are in vector format (their quality won't be lost by zooming). Many users have thanked me for those maps and I've just so wondered that why you are reverting! Please respond.
Plz join the talk and tell me why
Yours Sincerely ] 03:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Im qwert0617 ] (]) 14:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:You're placing these maps in every single country article (very high level articles) regardless of considerations including existing text, existing images, and individual utility of each map. This is in addition to the wider question of how much the average reader is likely to take from the map, given its very specific classification system and the paucity of information in the short sentence fragment captions given with them. I have aesthetic questions too, such as the inclusion of the title in the image when we have captions and a file names. ] (]) 03:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
:: If you have any problems with the title or the caption, why don't you update it or upload a new one??! If you think it ''"sandwiches"'' the texts why you don't rearrange the preview size? As I said I didn't make up those maps from myself. Those are completely based on koppen climate classification. ] 03:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
:::If there are pre-existing images there's only so much preview size can do, especially on wider monitors. This does not at any rate address the issues I noted. Nowhere though have I said anything about the maps being made up, so if you could explain that point I'd appreciate it. ] (]) 07:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


:I have already posted on the talk. If you are them, then you will see your message saying it was finished. ] (]) 15:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
== Nagorno-Karabakh ==


== Million Award for East Timor ==
This armenian oriented nagorno karabakh page continuously asserts that the land was always filled with armenians. I wonder why are my fucking edits being undone unreasonably when I have a solid proof of the facts that I have added. It is a fact that over 800,000 people have left the region as a result of united armenian-russian atrocities. Seeing the fucking sentences about the region consisting of always predominatly of armenians makes me mad. https://en.wikipedia.org/Nagorno-Karabakh_War. Here is ur fucking evidence. It is not fabricated we have tons of refugees living in Azerbaijan as a result of this Western-russia fuckery.
An estimated 800,000 Azeris were displaced from the fighting including those from both Armenia and Karabakh <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)</span></small>
:Specific edits should be backed up by ]. If you feel the NKR page is missing information, add it with a source, or discuss the matter on that article's talkpage and perhaps the editor who reverted you and others will participate in discussion there. ] (]) 10:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


{| style="border: 1px solid red; background-color: #fff7f7; width: 100%;"
== deleted update ==
| rowspan="2" | ]
| style="font-size: x-large;" | '''The Million Award'''
|-
| style="border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your contributions to bring ] (estimated annual readership: ) to ] status, I hereby present you the ]. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers! ] (]) 17:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
|}<!-- Template:Millionaward -->
Thanks for your work on this vital article! – ] (]) 17:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)


==Discussion at ]==
Why the updates are deleted. Why do you think that it is not appropriate.https://en.wikipedia.org/Nagorno-Karabakh_Republic. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:40, 20 March 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
]&nbsp;You are invited to join the discussion at ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)<!-- ] -->


== Girl Crazy infobox poster ==
== Revert previous edition of Kuala Lumpur ==


Why can't the public domain poster be used? ] (]) 22:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
You had previous deleted my post in ] which I had since reverted.
You commented that there were "over-emphasis" without explaining further. However based on your input, I had cleaned up the introduction section and introduced a new sub-heading "Ranking As A Global City" to place the relevant articles under one headings.] (]) 02:11, 18 May 2016 (UTC)


:It's currently used in the article. At any rate, the posters are clearly the same design and have the same copyright info, it is unlikely their copyright is different. How did you figure out the copyright on the poster was not renewed? ] (]) 23:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
== disputed territory ==
::Because it doesn't state it was. I also contacted the owner on where I found the poster and he said it's copyright was not renewed. ] (]) 10:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:::So can I please revert it? ] (]) 10:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
::::The copyright from the movie was renewed, per an ongoing discussion on Commons. As I noted, both posters will have the same status, which may or may not be affected by the movie copyright renewal. Further, the poster is already in the article. ] (]) 12:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Only the restoration of the film's copyright has been renewed. But the copyright for the poster has not been renewed ] (]) 15:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::If you have a source for that that would be of great help in the discussion. Either way, that would also apply to all the posters, not just one. ] (]) 17:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I emailed from the owner of the website "The Judy Room" who is Scott Brogan (where I found the Girl Crazy posters) and he said all of the posters, magazine ads, lobby cards; etc copyright's hasn't been renewed. So they are in the public domain. ] (]) 09:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::That is certainly a possibility. If so, that would as stated apply to the existing poster as well, so there isn't a public domain poster and a non-public domain poster. ] (]) 10:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::But the one that was uploaded as fair use was mistaken as fair use ] (]) 11:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::If true, why not fix that? ] (]) 12:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::Fix the fair use one? ] (]) 15:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::Per your information the posters are not fair use but public domain, so they can be fixed to state that. ] (]) 15:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Ok, I'll export it commons ] (]) 16:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)


== Out of curiosity ==
Hello, Chip! I jjst wanted to ask you to explain your logic to me. Disputed territory is not the same as self declared state. I will tell it in the easiest way. It is by far more neutral to say: "Something is disputed between that and that, while one think its this, and other think its that." Your proposition is like this: "Something is this. Someone thinks its that too, so its disputed what it is". As you can see, without this two words, we do not have NPOV, but POV with other opinions. All those "countries" are disputed between two entities, while both entities think is something else. Thats why i would revert your edits. --] (]) 08:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
:Describing something as a "self-declared state" inherently notes a statement of dispute. Otherwise we'd describe them without the adjective "self-declared". Your assertion assumes that we use one view in the opening sentence, but we do not. All these entities consider themselves legitimate and proper states, and we do not say that they are for the reasons of balance you bring up. We are not saying "Something is this. Someone thinks its that too, so its disputed what it is", we are saying "Something is this", and then going on to describe what "this" is. ] (]) 14:56, 18 May 2016 (UTC)


About your comment on an IP address' puffery, there was a longstanding issue surrounding this? As you did mention that none of this is new. ] (]) 18:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for May 20==


:There isn't anything definite, as these are IPs and so harder to draw links between, but the history of ] and ] for example have a lot of IPs that various tall building articles. It is likely at least some are the same person. That said, there's little that can be done with this, you'll need to do the normal dispute resolution processes. ] (]) 02:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (&nbsp;|&nbsp;). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>
::I see.
::Well, some have told me to let the ANI case to "play out", but there have been a couple of ANI cases previously that "played out" with zero resolution.
::It's been 24 hours and quite frankly, this case appears to be headed the same way - nothing. Considering other dispute resolution procedures, but said IP address is persistently ] and it is sad that ANI has yet to take action on such behaviour. ] (]) 04:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::It is difficult to get action on AN/I when an issue has both content and behaviour components. Best to do the normal ] and discussion out of the way to isolate the behavioural aspect. ] (]) 06:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Yeah... I have just opened a ], seeking for more consensus. Hope this works. ] (]) 08:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)


== Did USA really recognized North Korea? ==
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)


In recent months, I saw several concerns from other Wikipedias than enwiki that:
==Reverted your persistents rollbacks of my inline citations to "Malaysia" and "Kuala Lumpur"==
#How can Mongolia became a UN member state? Was that meaning that Taipei (UN seat holder before 1971) recognized Mongolia? North & South Koreas, just like Eastern & Western Germanys, they are bunded and sold.
#A country that can participant in UN, is related with ] that whether they vote oppose (aka. veto) the recommendation of UNSC, but unrelated with whether members of P5 recognize that country, or otherwise we don't need votes, we can just count the statements from "ministry of foreign affairs" of UNSC member states. Even one day United States recognized Palestine as a country, US representative can still veto the UNSC recommendation, so that Palestine still can't be a UN member. In 1991 when North and South Koreas joined UN, China even didn't recognize the South Korea, but why South Korea can still join?
#United Kingdom, Netherlands and Norway were stated in 1950 to recognize government of the People's Republic of China as China's legal government, and de-recognized Taipei regime. But originally these 3 countries all oppose Beijing's claim to replace Taipei's seat in UN, claim that Beijing should suspend their plans to join UN, or both to join UN each other. Thus they didn't establish diplomatic relations until 1954, when Norway decided to support Beijing instead of Taipei, and both UK & NL, which were semi-established whilst still ambiguous on China seat in UN. So far, during 1950-1954, were they recognized PRC government or not?
#During voting of the ], how much of states established with Taipei supported Beijing, some were even keeping ties with Taipei, after the vote, for several years, then how do we count these countries? Were they bi-recognized (i.e. recognize both PRC and Taipei govt)? Or just de facto recognized Beijing?
Which looks like doubting why enwiki removed United States, France, Japan,... from the North Korea entry of the ]. I'm not sure how to answer these doubts properly, so I need your helps on inputs. ] (]) 08:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)


:If I'm understanding the quandary correctly—I would reject the notion of {{xt|de facto recognition}} as a contradiction in terms—whether or not lack of recognition means a lack of relations, the concept of recognition ceases to mean anything at all if it becomes anything but explicit. There's not really a lens I can imagine where the US recognizes the DPRK, say, because it all hinges on the stuffy formality that likely correlates with material shifts in relations as well. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 09:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Your explanation that the data was "unsourced and undue. Military already covered in detail" was wrong as firstly, the sources are already provided (within Wiki itself! and the websites of the security forces) and secondly, "military" is NOT covered in the "Malaysia" webpage but in a separate webpage "Malaysian Armed Forces" and the "Royal Malaysian Police" while your explanation for your deletion of my post in the "2013 Lahad Datu standoff" was because that it was "not due to the Islamic insurgencies of Thailand or the Philippines" is irrelevant because nowhere was there any reference in my post that the incident was due to "to the Islamic insurgencies of Thailand or the Philippines."!] (]) 04:41, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
::Thanks Remsense. In 1961 the ROC did not vote on the Mongolia admission, see ]. North and South Korea joined together through ], which passed without a vote. As these show, relations and politics are complicated. The China and UN-related questions presume a direct link between recognition and UN votes. They presume a relationship between recognition and relations. Neither of these are the case. As Remsense notes, the essence of recognition (in the modern world) is formal. Recognition is needed for diplomatic relations on a formal level, but relations can occur informally. However, a lack of recognition does not stop one state engaging with an entity they do not accord formal recognition, and conversely the presence of formal recognition does not create the certainty of engagement. ] (]) 09:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:], military is currently covered in the ] subsection. As for sourcing, sources need to be on the page the text is on. Regarding the Lahad Datu standoff, you specifically put it in a sentence regarding Islamic insurgencies, writing "There are fears that extremist militants activities in the Muslim areas of the southern Philippines and southern Thailand would spill over into Malaysia, '''''as it did''''' in the 2013 Lahad Datu standoff when 235 seaborne Philippines militants attacked and killed 10 Malaysian soldiers and police officers and 6 civillians, with 56 fatalities on the militant's sides.." ] (]) 08:48, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
:::It seems the common sense position that the US does not formally recognize the DPRK, but the two clearly have diplomatic relations, and particularly debacular ones at that <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 09:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
::::There are relations between their diplomats for sure. One of the issues with using the plain term "diplomatic relations" to have a narrow formal meaning perhaps, or more likely the purity of the ideal of international relations bending to accommodate reality, as it often does. "Does X recognize Y" is an extremely narrow question with an extremely narrow answer. "Does X have a relationship with Y" is a similar question but with an entirely different scope. ] (]) 09:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)


== Disruptive edits by an IP ==
], Regarding your frequent persistent rollbacks on ], you had had stated that I had ''specifically put it in a sentence regarding Islamic insurgencies, writing "There are fears that extremist militants activities in the Muslim areas of the southern Philippines and southern Thailand would spill over into Malaysia..'' where you commented that '''The Lahud (sic) Datu standoff was not due to the Islamic insurgencies of Thailand or the Philippines.'''


Hello, Chipmunkdavis.
The statement ''There are fears that extremist militants activities in the Muslim areas of the southern Philippines and southern Thailand would spill over into Malaysia'' is ''' NOT my statement and I did not wrote that line.''' as you had wrongly accused me off, when you wrote that '''The Lahud (sic) Datu standoff was not due to the Islamic insurgencies of Thailand or the Philippines.'''


The ] is engaging in disrupte editing. Neither does this IP provide sources and is POV pushing. And this IP has been warned multiple times for this on his/her talk page including by yourself.
That line referred to the "extremist militants from the Muslim areas of Phillipinnes" which was from where all the ] attackers came from!


Kindest regards, ] (]) 20:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
It was stated in several references in the ] that the armed militants were indeed extremist militants from the Muslim areas of ] of the southern Philippines. But nowhere did any reference to '''the Islamic insurgencies of Thailand or the Philippines''' was mentioned in my statement, but you wrongly and mistakenly ''inferred'' that it was and hence your '''rollbacks'''!


:] if they are continuing to be disruptive, you can ask for intervention at ]. ] (]) 02:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
However after your persistent '''rollbacks''' I had reverted the incident as follows:
::Thank you for the advice. ] (]) 06:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
The Philippines has a ] to the eastern part of Sabah, which burst into global spotlight from February 11, 2013 to March 24, 2013 when 235 seaborne militants from the Philippines attacked Lahad Datu, ], ended after more than a month of battle, with 6 civilians and 10 Malaysian security forces personnel killed and 56 militants dead, resulted from a long-simmering unresolved territorial claim by the heirs to the Philippines Sulu sultans to eastern Sabah (the former North Borneo), Malaysia. (with inline citations included to BBC)


== WikiProject Malaysia September 2024 newsletter ==
There is again no reference "to the '''Islamic''' insurgencies of Thailand or the Philippines."


{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Malaysia/Newsroom/Newsletter/September 2024}}
Again your '''persistent and disruptive rollbacks''' on ]'s "Global And Regional Rankings" reflected your partiality on NPOV issues. I had referred to the '' WP:ONUS and WP:SUMMARYSTYLE to understand issues in recent Malaysia-related edits'' that you referred to and I am pleased that my comments fulfilled both criteria well. "Global And Regional Rankings" are directly relevant to the article and I cannot understand why you persisted and insisted that it is not. ] (]) 01:39, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


== WikiProject Malaysia October 2024 newsletter ==
:{{tps}} {{ping|Escravoes}} If you are so obsessed to add those kind of ] . Why don't you give a try to add similar rankings like that to other popular city articles of ], ], ] and ] etc? Let's see whether you get reverted from those countries editors for the same reason or not. As for the ] article, you separate those single words of territorial dispute into many paragraph which is not necessary for GA articles as it have been included in one paragraph. ] (]) 02:35, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Malaysia/Newsroom/Newsletter/October 2024}}
===Accusation of "Spammy Rankings" of Kuala Lumpur by Reuters, Trip Advisor, Daily Mail, by ]===
] It is unfortunate that you consider rankings of Kuala Lumpur quoted on ], ], ], ], several major Malaysian newsmedia and even mentioned specifically in a major global tourism conference in Kuala Lumpur as ]


== WikiProject Malaysia November 2024 newsletter ==
As for the ] article, I separated "those single words of territorial dispute into many paragraphs" to provide inline citations, which helped to improve content and facilitate cross-referencing and verifiability.] (]) 02:51, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Malaysia/Newsroom/Newsletter/November 2024}}
::{{tps}} {{ping|Escravoes}} {{red|The website are not a spammy things. But the way you put along all those gargantuan (huge) rankings is not necessary for every city articles in Misplaced Pages which would be considered as}} ''']'''. Moreover, you put it before the history part which is not necessary to have its own section. Again, for Malaysia article, there is no need to separate it like that even if you provide additional citation. ] (]) 02:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


== January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive ==
===Reply to ] of '''those gargantuan (huge) rankings ''' for Kuala Lumpur===
], Thanks for now admitting that my paragraphs are NOT '''spammy rankings''. Much appreciated.


{| style="border: 2px solid #36c; border-radius: 4px; background: #F6FAFF; padding: 10px; color: #000;"
Your earlier "warning" to me of ''vandalism'' under threat of "This is your only warning; if you vandalize Misplaced Pages again, as you did at Kuala Lumpur, you may be blocked from editing without further notice" was uncalled for and premature.
| style="vertical-align: middle; font-size: 130%" |

]
I am at lost what you meant by "gargantuan (huge) rankings" as you put it, which you claimed I was ''so obsessed with''. But if it is gargantuan because the rankings are "global and regional", then they are meant to be as such - both global and regional rankings and perhaps gigantic.
| rowspan=3 | ]

But in fact they are very reliable rankings from good reliable sources including the '''Financial Times, Reuters, Tripadvisor''', which you should not have considered as ''']''' in the first place and kept reverting disruptively. If you had disagreed with me placing "rankings' before "history", then you or ] could have constructively re-positioned the paragraph, rather than outright deletions, which you did several times. I had however re-positioned the "ranking" paragraph after "history"

Again, for Malaysia article, I separated "those single words of territorial dispute into many paragraphs" to provide inline citations, which helped to improve content and facilitate cross-referencing and verifiability.
] (]) 03:49, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

==Reference to Rollbacks on ] and ]==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 11:09, 22 May 2016</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->] (]) 18:49, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

== ] ==

Please participate in a ]--<big>]</big>] 18:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

== Could you present your opinion? ==

Hi there, I did some digging, and I found out the notorious Georgian , who had a frantic POV to try and push Georgia into Europe and break all its Asian bonds, really had a dislike for you. He created tons of socks over the span of many years all having the same insane obsession, namely "preaching" this Georgia is Europe agenda on Misplaced Pages. He often created socks with hate names referring to you (, , etc.) as well. Does this all ring some bells, perhaps? Well, he has returned on a new sock and has managed to dodge the bullet for a few months now. Glad I found the SPI case. Considering you had alot of interaction with previous socks, would you mind presenting your opinion here on . Bests and thanks - ] (]) 01:57, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

:Your report is very detailed and convincing ]. As you can imagine, the evidence you have posted rings quite a few bells, given the former unpleasantness of dealing with this user that you mention. I was on a long wikibreak until recently, which is likely why I didn't notice this user. I am disappointed that this is all still going on. I will keep an eye on the SPI and will make an official comment if I feel it would be helpful, but frankly you've tied up the case pretty well. If the SPI goes through and the thankless task of removing their edits per ] needs to begin, feel free to inform me and I will do what I can to help. ] (]) 22:48, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

::Hey, I haven't really been online since the 11th, so I couldn't give you a response. It's all over now anyways. Thanks for having reverted there where needed. If you need my help, opinion, comment or whatever regarding anything in the future, please don't hesitate to let me know. Bests and take care for now - ] (]) 15:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

== Administrators noticeboard notification ==

] This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:AN-notice--> <big>]</big>] 14:54, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

== Citation Hunting ==

Hi, I've recently started to help out using the 'citation hunt' page. I need to know the etiquette regarding facially absurd, or, after considerable research, unsupported 'facts' that have been cite-tagged. Should I go ahead and cut the passage or post to talk-page first? Sorry to bother you with this. Thanks.] (]) 22:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
:Hey ], a noble cause. The answer is to be ], while applying your judgement. If something has been cite tagged for awhile, and you can't find any sources about the point in question, there's no reason you shouldn't remove it. Add an edit summary explaining the removal of course. If it has only recently been tagged, or you feel there is merit to the statement even though you can't find a source, it may be worth leaving it for a bit. However, even then if you do choose to remove it (which you can), the worst that will happen is someone reverting it, so no harm done! ] (]) 22:20, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
{{DRN-notice}} ] (]) 02:24, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

== Formal mediation has been requested ==
{{Ivmbox
| <!---MedComBot-Do-not-remove-this-line-Notified-Eritrea's geographical naming--->The ] has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Eritrea's geographical naming". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. ] is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the ], the ], and the ], '''please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate.''' Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 3 September 2016.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.<br>
<small>Message delivered by ] (]) on ] of the Mediation Committee. 03:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC)</small>
}}

== Request for mediation rejected ==
{{Ivmbox
| The ] concerning Eritrea's geographical naming, to which you were listed as a party, has been ]. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the ], which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the ] of the Committee, or to the ]. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see ].

For the Mediation Committee, ] (]) 03:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC)<br>
<small>(Delivered by ], ] the Mediation Committee.)</small>
}}

== Responses to DYK Isha Gramotsavam ==

Hi, I've addressed the concerns you raised for ]. ] (]) 15:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
== Reference errors on 27 August ==

] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. {{#ifeq:1|1|It is|They are}} as follows:
*On the ] page, caused a ] <small>(])</small>. ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can .
Thanks, <!-- User:ReferenceBot/inform -->] (]) 00:18, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

== WikiProject Malaysia September 2016 Newsletter ==

<!-- This is a template page for the WikiProject Malaysia newsletter. Please do not make any changes without leaving a message on the project's talk page. -->
{| class="navbox" style="background: transparent; text-align: left; border: 1px solid black; margin-top: 0.5em;"
|- valign="middle" style="background-color: #FFCC00; color:solid black"
|width="33%" style="padding:5px" align="left"|]
|width="33%" style="padding:5px" align="center"|<big>]<br /> Newsletter''' </big>
|width="33%" style="padding:5px" align="right"|]
|- |-
|
|colspan=3 style="background-color: #FF8000; color:solid black" text-align:center; font-weight:bold;border-bottom: 1px |<span style=color:white"><center> Issue 5 • ] • ]</center>
* On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
* Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed.
* Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words.
* Interested in taking part? ''']'''.
|- |-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from ] or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add ] to your user talk page.
|colspan=3 style="background-color: white; color:black; font-size:1.15em" text-align:left; font-weight:none; border-bottom: 1px |
* We have a '''big news'''! WikiProject had been ''semi-''revived by ]! WikiProject Malaysia had been inactive from for more than 3 years.
* If you wish to make the ] fully active again, there's a lot of way of doing this:
:# Maybe work on some Malaysia article now! You may go to ] and ] for articles you might be interested.
:# Add ''{{TI|WikiProject Malaysia}}'' tag to all the Malaysia associated articles at the ] page. Remember to state the class and the importance of the article. For more information see ].
:# Create a Malaysia-related article like an actor and a company! Just remember to follow the ] and was written in ].
:# Invite others to join Malaysia WikiProject using ]!
:# Expand our missing content at our WikiProject page since it's outdated, or improve it.
:# You may also leave a message or a note at the WikiProject ] about what you are doing recently and share your thoughts and work with each other.
* We greatly appreciate for your contributions and help of Malaysia article. Let's make WikiProject Malaysia great again! And also happy ]!
|-
| colspan=3 style="background-color: #FF8000; text-align:center; font-weight:bold; border-top:1px" | ] • ]
|-
| colspan=3 style="background-color: White; text-align:center; font-weight:bold; border-top:1px" | <small>Newsletter written by ] ] <small>(Delivered: 17:48, 28 August 2016 (UTC))</small>. You may opt-out of this monthly newsletter by removing your name ].</small>
|} |}


] (]) 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
<!-- MMS Delivery requested at WT:MMS Special:PermaLink/736597579 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Malaysia/Newsroom/Subscription&oldid=736596529 --> <!-- Message sent by User:Queen of Hearts@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Good_articles/GAN_Backlog_Drives/January_2025/Mass_message_list&oldid=1263928765 -->


== In-Text Citations ==
== ] ==


I'm adding a new source to ] for the great axe factory of the ]. This is my bibliography citation: *{{cite web |url=https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/407068/ |publisher= UK Government |title=Axe Factory, Graig Lwyd;Graiglwyd |date=2021| ref={{Harvid|UKGov|2021}} }}. This is my in-text citation: {{sfn|UKGov|2021}}. I feel like I'm doing something wrong, specifically with the in-text citation. Please let me know if I am. ] (]) 16:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
I have declined speedy deletion of the Kuala Lumpur Marathon draft and I have moved it to ]. You indicted you wished to incorporate material from that draft to the main article, so I have not tagged the article for deletion. Be aware that I did tag it with an Articles for Creation tag and it will be deleted in six months time. ] (]) 00:22, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
:Hi ], what do you feel is going wrong? The in-line citation seems to correctly link to the long-form citation. If you're worried about specific formatting quirks, I would say don't worry about it too much, so long as it's clear what the source is any editor can tweak it. ] (]) 08:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}


== Season's Greetings ==
== ] ==
Hello. I've revamped the contest page into this, based on the new British model. Long term goal, but I've added entries since the beginning of July to give it some initial life. Please add anything you've done then this then too! I hope it proves productive long term. The contests are still planned, but will be more tools towards increasing bulk output in overall goal. It's a permanent goal now, and open! I would be grateful if you could keep a record of all your articles you do there, as I really think seeing the combined efforts will encourage others to create more content too! Please spread the word to the others, cheers!♦ ] 09:18, 3 September 2016 (UTC)


{| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FFF7E6;"
== Sukhumi ==
|rowspan="2" valign="right" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" | '''Season's Greetings'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | <blockquote>When he took up his hat to go, he gave one long look round the library. Then he turned ... (and Saxon took advantage of this to wag his way in and join the party), and said, "It's a rare privilege, the free entry of a book chamber like this. I'm hoping ... that you are not insensible of it." </blockquote>


(Text on page 17 illustrated in the ] in ]'s ''Mary's Meadow and Other Tales of Fields and Flowers'', illustrated by ], London: G. Bell and Sons, 1915.)
Hi Chip, to my amazement (I just had a proper read) the lede of the ] article contained some huge POV, and, of course, when I had a look at , thats mainly thanks to our buddy, who's doing his very best to keep that revision there at whatever cost. I just to make it fit more conform the ] standards and to actually reflect the verifiable facts, but I think, nevertheless, we have to keep an eye on this. If you already have the article on your watch, then consider this message to be not sent. Bests - ] (]) 17:29, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
:I do have Sukhumi on my watchlist and have edited it before, but it's not an article I've keep a continuous eye on. It is unsurprising to me to find POV in articles related to the Caucasus, and Sukhumi isn't an exception, although it's a more interesting one as I've seen users and IPs that seem to espouse various POVs editing there, instead of just one slant. Thanks for the heads up, I'll keep a keener eye out. ] (]) 23:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)


]] 04:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
== Disruptive CN tags on ] ==
|}

:], very grateful for another yearly welcome. I'm afraid this book was not part of my childhood, I will have to look into it with new eyes. ] (]) 16:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello ]. You removed my tags on the East Timor article as being disruptive. I do think there is a citation needed because the source now given is a working document of a UN commission and not a document by the Timorese authorities. The document now cited doesn't establish facts on names of countries in official use by these countries persé, specially not when there are conflicting translations in use in other places. Like the constitution of the country in it's English translation. I will not challenge your revert however but I'd be happy to restore, for the time, the source I initially removed as failing, when I got involved in the situation yesterday evening. Thus restoring the source that was there, while not taking away anything that was added since. This for more clarity in the discussion that is bound to follow. ] (]) 19:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
::I inherited this book from a relative, who may have inherited it from an older relative! Ewing is mostly out of print now. Fashions have changed. Her writing is probably more moralistic than is accepted now, even though she wasn't really by the standards of the late 19th century. Even so every now and then in her books you find some real gems of writing. ]] 18:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:I have now restored the earlier source I had removed as having failed. Just so it can be seen as this is being discussed. ] (]) 20:05, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
::At the very least the UNGEGN source establishes official names used within the UN system. A cn tag next to a citation will be confusing for any user not already familiar with the talkpage dispute, and it is unnecessary to place one prominently in the infobox as well as in the text. If you do not like the UNGEGN source, perhaps you could pick a source you do like from publications of the East Timorese government? ] (]) 00:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
:::I won't remove the UNGEGN source. ] (]) 04:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

==DYK for Elections in Jordan==
{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that opposition to what was called the "]" system used in ''']''' led to it being replaced for the ''']'''?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and it may be added to ] if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> ] (]) 00:02, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

==DYK for Jordanian general election, 2016==
{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that opposition to what was called the "]" system used in ''']''' led to it being replaced for the ''']'''?'' You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and it may be added to ] if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> ] (]) 00:02, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

== Starting work at ] ==

This has been long overdue so I am starting work on the Singapore lead. I have set up a talk page section for discussion. ]. I would appreciate if you could help out. --] (]) 05:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

== WikiProject Malaysia October 2016 Newsletter ==

{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Malaysia/Newsroom/Newsletter|issue=6|my=October 2016|written=] ] (Delivered: 12:30, 1 October 2016 (UTC))
|news=
*''']''' had been promoted to ]. Kudos to everyone who help contributing to the article, even a little.
*Our current goal for now is to help ''']''' every WikiProject Malaysia of the articles' quality and importance. You can use ] and save it at the bookmark bar. Currently there are about 25% unassessed articles. See also: ].
*Follow our Facebook page ! We'll keep you up-to-date of recent happenings in the WP:MY.
*Welcome new users who have interest on Malaysia-related articles with the new template: {{TI|Welcome-my}}.
*Please help participating in the '']'' discussion that was Malaysia-related. See ]. Thank you!
*'''''Tips of the month:''''' Watchlisting the ] can help you keep up to date of all the ''XfD'', '']'' and other related alerts about Malaysia articles.
}}

] (]) 12:30, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Jim Carter@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Malaysia/Newsroom/Subscription&oldid=737210311 -->

== WikiProject Malaysia November 2016 Newsletter ==

{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Malaysia/Newsroom/Newsletter2|issue=7|my=November 2016|written=] ] (Delivered: 09:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC))
|news=
*Please help promote or review the new ], ''''']''''', a historic ] at ]. Please voice out your opinion at ].
*The ''']''', had been launched on ], it is an online edit-a-thon aimed at enhancing understanding among Asian Misplaced Pages communities. It will take place in November 2016. We encourage you to join the edit-a-thon as long as inviting the others!
*We upgraded the newsletter to let all the members know the current statistics and information about the project, and also add some images!
*'''''Tips of the month:''''' You may watchlist the ] of Malaysia. Or follow as well as leave a like at our Facebook page !
|nsp=10,000|article=6,850|FA=10|GA=46|stub=2,500|unknown=1,620|members=24
}}
<!-- Message sent by User:NgYShung@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Malaysia/Newsroom/Subscription&oldid=737210311 -->

== Singapore ==

Chipmunkdavis, I have just seen your bold edits, which is fine. Generally, I would agree with half of your removal but will revert/copy-edit others later or next two days, especially those which are sourced. Hope to avoid an edit-war and discuss on the Talk page. I would prefer that you state your stance since too much has gone on in the last few weeks. Is it fine with you? ] (]) 14:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
:My stance? My edits were made discretely, each with a very short edit summary which hopefully gave an outline of my stance on them. What from them is unclear? ] (]) 14:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
::Your summary is quite clear indeed but may be disputed, then we settle it cordially in Talk or RFC, as per WP guidelines to avoid edit-warring accusations. ] (]) 15:10, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Dispute resolution applies as always, of course. That said, after the RfC on lead statistics concluded they were overdone, you started a new section saying they should be kept because they were in the body. What form of resolutions can you envisage there? Is there a need to resolve your edits which made the original changes to the lead? ] (]) 15:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
::::I do have to retire earlier tonight but will have a look at what you're saying, reply tmr. ] (]) 16:00, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

:::::I see what you are asking. Firstly, I would have objected to the manner RFC closed, right after I posted an update of ] and immediately after Warpslider changed his 'Comment' to 'Oppose'. Given a few more days, the outcome may have been different. That aside, the RFC closing summary reads {{tq|"There is broad though not unanimous consensus that the lead needs to be trimmed, and that the statistics are overdone"}}. What to trim? It will be by Consensus correct? Does trimming refer to just the stats or everything? One editor does not determine that. She bold-removed paragraph-5 with the edit summary "Unsourced boosterism", and my reply in Talk is "..all the statements are sourced in body content - widely acknowledged, not boosterism." -] (]) 16:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::In that case you should raise it with the RfC closer. RfCs are not votes, and are determined by the arguments taking into account wikipedia policy. Stonewalling changes is not appropriate conduct, consensus at its best includes all editors ban it does not have to. The very least that requires is participation, and that talkpage conversation ended when you stopped replying, which is unhelpful. ] (]) 01:34, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

:::::::CMD, I think you are referring to my non-response to your reply to ? On that occassion I saw Lemongirl had extended the RFC from 30d to 60days, so I decided to wait for further response from uninvolved editors. All comments at that point in time came from editors with some edit history in Singapore like yourself and would have some bias. My time is really limited and thought it best to consolidate answers to a single section - that way, others can digest all the main issues before commenting. A substantial reply like you did, then no engagement I admit is frustrating. Although not for the same reasons, see my own efforts at ] and early ] - both times I lost interest (but not forever) as WP does not pay my bills. I did find your reply to the first "Specific issues" draft helpful and addressed most of it in the 2nd update. I think you do still have some bias, which are hard to change so hopefully the pillars can help sought it out soon. I agree RFC is a lot of work and not the best way. ] (]) 10:24, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

::::::::If editing an article creates bias, then there's no hope for any of us. At any rate, I was not referring to that, I was referring to the new section you started after the RfC had ended in response to LemonGirl's implementation, which you titled "Sources". I would ask you to think carefully about bias and where it lies, given your previous statement about deliberately ignoring negative statements in favour of positive ones for the lead. ] (]) 10:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

*Note: See ]. I am sick and tired of this, so I am seeking to restrict Wrigleygum and the other SPAs from editing that page. --] (]) 15:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

== Attempt to privatize article about Georgia ==

Your decisions are worthless unless won't provide proper arguments for every revert of other users edits! This article is not your property to do not let other user make changes in text. If you something to say, '''write down''' every argument in the talk page and then act if it will be consensus on that. "imbalanced pointy edits" is not an argument!--<big>]</big>] 11:44, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:42, 26 December 2024


Archives

Shiny stuff
Balkan, Caucasus, SEAsia, Malaysia, Philippines, other countries
Nature, Geography, Miscellaneous
Notices, Chitchat, Office


Please click here to leave me a new message.

Welcome! If you post on this page, I will respond on this page. If I post on your talk page, I will have it watchlisted for the duration of the conversation (and possibly longer!), but please feel free to ping me if I appear to have missed something.

Please explain this to me

I do not understand why you reverted my edit on Talk:Nauru or Talk:Canada,while it is probably within the range of talk page use,it was not related to those articles, the thread on Talk:Nauru I removed because it was related to the article Nauru 19,not the Article Nauru,and the thread on Talk:Canada I removed is because it was related to the article Canadaland,not the article Canada UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 03:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

also in Talk:United States I removed an uncivil comment,that happens on wikipedia when comments are not civil, am I wrong? UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 03:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
I did not revert your edit on Talk:Canada. There is a point where discussions are removed but both of those threads did not get close to that point. Uncivil comments are not usually removed no, and the one you removed was not even uncivil. Please stop trying to moderate talkpages, it takes some time to become familiar with the norms here. CMD (talk) 04:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Looking at your contribution history,I see you to have removed comments and threads,thisfor example,that is what I was trying to do UnsungHistory (Wrong Edit!) 02:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
That is not what you were doing. A clear difference for example is that the comment I removed was random gibberish, the comments you removed were about article development. CMD (talk) 02:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
@UnsungHistory, I'm going to try being blunt again: you are a comparatively inexperienced editor. If you are not yet sure what the distinctions in the rules are generally understood to be, then please refrain from enforcing those rules and just observe what others do instead for now, and ask about things that might be real problems first. Remsense ‥ 论 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article nominee

Hello, I recently nominated the article Le langaige du Bresil as a good article under the Language and literature subtopic, though I believe it could also fit under World history. Since you have not "contributed significantly" to the article, you might be able to review it according to the criteria. I would like to know if, having the necessary skills for this, you would be willing to do so. Thank you, RodRabelo7 (talk) 12:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Noted RodRabelo7. I am not full of time at the moment, but I will keep it in mind for the next time I look at GAN. Fear not someone will look at it at some point. Best, CMD (talk) 15:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry to bug you

Is my reasons at Talk:Israel#Tag not clear or out to lunch? Should I remove the tag over tryng to move forward in improve the section? Is this just a case of one of us or both of us exhibiting mind-boggling stupidity. Moxy🍁 18:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind...going with Misplaced Pages:Avoiding difficult users to much effort for any change.SORRY TO TAKE UP YOUR READING TIME! Moxy🍁 20:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Join the talk

Why did you undo my writting? Plz join the talk and tell me why Im qwert0617 211.213.219.100 (talk) 14:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

I have already posted on the talk. If you are them, then you will see your message saying it was finished. CMD (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Million Award for East Timor

The Million Award
For your contributions to bring East Timor (estimated annual readership: 1,170,000) to good article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers! Reidgreg (talk) 17:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this vital article! – Reidgreg (talk) 17:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy) § Propose to create page of block discussion in noticeboards

 You are invited to join the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy) § Propose to create page of block discussion in noticeboards. JPPEDRA2 21:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Girl Crazy infobox poster

Why can't the public domain poster be used? Jorge906 (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

It's currently used in the article. At any rate, the posters are clearly the same design and have the same copyright info, it is unlikely their copyright is different. How did you figure out the copyright on the poster was not renewed? CMD (talk) 23:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Because it doesn't state it was. I also contacted the owner on where I found the poster and he said it's copyright was not renewed. Jorge906 (talk) 10:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
So can I please revert it? Jorge906 (talk) 10:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
The copyright from the movie was renewed, per an ongoing discussion on Commons. As I noted, both posters will have the same status, which may or may not be affected by the movie copyright renewal. Further, the poster is already in the article. CMD (talk) 12:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Only the restoration of the film's copyright has been renewed. But the copyright for the poster has not been renewed Jorge906 (talk) 15:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
If you have a source for that that would be of great help in the discussion. Either way, that would also apply to all the posters, not just one. CMD (talk) 17:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
I emailed from the owner of the website "The Judy Room" who is Scott Brogan (where I found the Girl Crazy posters) and he said all of the posters, magazine ads, lobby cards; etc copyright's hasn't been renewed. So they are in the public domain. Jorge906 (talk) 09:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
That is certainly a possibility. If so, that would as stated apply to the existing poster as well, so there isn't a public domain poster and a non-public domain poster. CMD (talk) 10:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
But the one that was uploaded as fair use was mistaken as fair use Jorge906 (talk) 11:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
If true, why not fix that? CMD (talk) 12:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Fix the fair use one? Jorge906 (talk) 15:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Per your information the posters are not fair use but public domain, so they can be fixed to state that. CMD (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Ok, I'll export it commons Jorge906 (talk) 16:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Out of curiosity

About your comment on an IP address' puffery, there was a longstanding issue surrounding this? As you did mention that none of this is new. hundenvonPG (talk) 18:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

There isn't anything definite, as these are IPs and so harder to draw links between, but the history of Merdeka 118 and List of tallest buildings in Malaysia for example have a lot of IPs that various tall building articles. It is likely at least some are the same person. That said, there's little that can be done with this, you'll need to do the normal dispute resolution processes. CMD (talk) 02:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I see.
Well, some have told me to let the ANI case to "play out", but there have been a couple of ANI cases previously that "played out" with zero resolution.
It's been 24 hours and quite frankly, this case appears to be headed the same way - nothing. Considering other dispute resolution procedures, but said IP address is persistently WP:HOUNDING and it is sad that ANI has yet to take action on such behaviour. hundenvonPG (talk) 04:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
It is difficult to get action on AN/I when an issue has both content and behaviour components. Best to do the normal WP:3O and discussion out of the way to isolate the behavioural aspect. CMD (talk) 06:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Yeah... I have just opened a WP:DRN, seeking for more consensus. Hope this works. hundenvonPG (talk) 08:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Did USA really recognized North Korea?

In recent months, I saw several concerns from other Wikipedias than enwiki that:

  1. How can Mongolia became a UN member state? Was that meaning that Taipei (UN seat holder before 1971) recognized Mongolia? North & South Koreas, just like Eastern & Western Germanys, they are bunded and sold.
  2. A country that can participant in UN, is related with P5 that whether they vote oppose (aka. veto) the recommendation of UNSC, but unrelated with whether members of P5 recognize that country, or otherwise we don't need votes, we can just count the statements from "ministry of foreign affairs" of UNSC member states. Even one day United States recognized Palestine as a country, US representative can still veto the UNSC recommendation, so that Palestine still can't be a UN member. In 1991 when North and South Koreas joined UN, China even didn't recognize the South Korea, but why South Korea can still join?
  3. United Kingdom, Netherlands and Norway were stated in 1950 to recognize government of the People's Republic of China as China's legal government, and de-recognized Taipei regime. But originally these 3 countries all oppose Beijing's claim to replace Taipei's seat in UN, claim that Beijing should suspend their plans to join UN, or both to join UN each other. Thus they didn't establish diplomatic relations until 1954, when Norway decided to support Beijing instead of Taipei, and both UK & NL, which were semi-established whilst still ambiguous on China seat in UN. So far, during 1950-1954, were they recognized PRC government or not?
  4. During voting of the 2758 resolution, how much of states established with Taipei supported Beijing, some were even keeping ties with Taipei, after the vote, for several years, then how do we count these countries? Were they bi-recognized (i.e. recognize both PRC and Taipei govt)? Or just de facto recognized Beijing?

Which looks like doubting why enwiki removed United States, France, Japan,... from the North Korea entry of the List of states with limited recognition. I'm not sure how to answer these doubts properly, so I need your helps on inputs. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

If I'm understanding the quandary correctly—I would reject the notion of de facto recognition as a contradiction in terms—whether or not lack of recognition means a lack of relations, the concept of recognition ceases to mean anything at all if it becomes anything but explicit. There's not really a lens I can imagine where the US recognizes the DPRK, say, because it all hinges on the stuffy formality that likely correlates with material shifts in relations as well. Remsense ‥ 论 09:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Remsense. In 1961 the ROC did not vote on the Mongolia admission, see United Nations Security Council Resolution 166. North and South Korea joined together through United Nations Security Council Resolution 702, which passed without a vote. As these show, relations and politics are complicated. The China and UN-related questions presume a direct link between recognition and UN votes. They presume a relationship between recognition and relations. Neither of these are the case. As Remsense notes, the essence of recognition (in the modern world) is formal. Recognition is needed for diplomatic relations on a formal level, but relations can occur informally. However, a lack of recognition does not stop one state engaging with an entity they do not accord formal recognition, and conversely the presence of formal recognition does not create the certainty of engagement. CMD (talk) 09:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
It seems the common sense position that the US does not formally recognize the DPRK, but the two clearly have diplomatic relations, and particularly debacular ones at that Remsense ‥ 论 09:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
There are relations between their diplomats for sure. One of the issues with using the plain term "diplomatic relations" to have a narrow formal meaning perhaps, or more likely the purity of the ideal of international relations bending to accommodate reality, as it often does. "Does X recognize Y" is an extremely narrow question with an extremely narrow answer. "Does X have a relationship with Y" is a similar question but with an entirely different scope. CMD (talk) 09:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Disruptive edits by an IP

Hello, Chipmunkdavis.

The User talk:185.146.112.192 is engaging in disrupte editing. Neither does this IP provide sources and is POV pushing. And this IP has been warned multiple times for this on his/her talk page including by yourself.

Kindest regards, Moroike (talk) 20:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Moroike if they are continuing to be disruptive, you can ask for intervention at WP:AN/I. CMD (talk) 02:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the advice. Moroike (talk) 06:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Malaysia September 2024 newsletter

The Malaysia WikiProject
Newsletter
Issue 53 • September 2024 • About the Newsletter
WikiProject Malaysia Statistics
Past Newsletter • Newsroom • Malaysia Noticeboard • Malaysia Portal
Newsletter written by Chongkian. You may opt-out of this monthly newsletter by removing your name here.

WikiProject Malaysia October 2024 newsletter

The Malaysia WikiProject
Newsletter
Issue 54 • October 2024 • About the Newsletter
WikiProject Malaysia Statistics
Past Newsletter • Newsroom • Malaysia Noticeboard • Malaysia Portal
Newsletter written by Chongkian. You may opt-out of this monthly newsletter by removing your name here.

WikiProject Malaysia November 2024 newsletter

The Malaysia WikiProject
Newsletter
Issue 55 • November 2024 • About the Newsletter
WikiProject Malaysia Statistics
Past Newsletter • Newsroom • Malaysia Noticeboard • Malaysia Portal
Newsletter written by Chongkian. You may opt-out of this monthly newsletter by removing your name here.

January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive

January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive

  • On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

In-Text Citations

I'm adding a new source to Prehistoric Wales for the great axe factory of the Neolithic. This is my bibliography citation: *"Axe Factory, Graig Lwyd;Graiglwyd". UK Government. 2021.. This is my in-text citation: . I feel like I'm doing something wrong, specifically with the in-text citation. Please let me know if I am. Brioche23 (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Brioche23, what do you feel is going wrong? The in-line citation seems to correctly link to the long-form citation. If you're worried about specific formatting quirks, I would say don't worry about it too much, so long as it's clear what the source is any editor can tweak it. CMD (talk) 08:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. UKGov 2021.

Season's Greetings

Season's Greetings

When he took up his hat to go, he gave one long look round the library. Then he turned ... (and Saxon took advantage of this to wag his way in and join the party), and said, "It's a rare privilege, the free entry of a book chamber like this. I'm hoping ... that you are not insensible of it."

(Text on page 17 illustrated in the frontispiece in Juliana Horatia Ewing's Mary's Meadow and Other Tales of Fields and Flowers, illustrated by Mary Wheelhouse, London: G. Bell and Sons, 1915.)

Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Fowler&fowler, very grateful for another yearly welcome. I'm afraid this book was not part of my childhood, I will have to look into it with new eyes. CMD (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
I inherited this book from a relative, who may have inherited it from an older relative! Ewing is mostly out of print now. Fashions have changed. Her writing is probably more moralistic than is accepted now, even though she wasn't really by the standards of the late 19th century. Even so every now and then in her books you find some real gems of writing. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)